On 24-10-2010 1:15, Nicolas Riendeau wrote:
> Hi!
>> On 10/22/2010 1:23 PM, Nicolas Riendeau wrote:
>> I haven't tried Pootle yet... It does look like it support Qt files
>> natively which makes it interesting...
>> I had a chance to play with it and its overall a nice program...
>> It does currently have one major blocker as far as usage with MythTV is
> concerned, it is currently unable to deal with plurals in Qt ts files.
>> re: http://bugs.locamotion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1727
I know, I am subscribed to it as well. I found that the same day while
testing on my local installation. It seems they are thinking of a
temporary solution, until their release schedule allows for a
fundamental change and a more permanent fix.
> There are other things that must be looked into but this is the major
> issue I can see with this application right now.
Is there a public list of things that we would like for a translation
interface? Or is it just you and Kenny deciding?
> The point there was more than Qt Linguist is easy to work with and gets
> the job done.
>
> It is however a lot more difficult to distribute work with it as
> everybody has its own little copy of the translation on his pc.
True.
> That doesn't mean its impossible to do though (for the French
> translation we had to exchange a lot of emails (using a mailing list)
> and we have our own SVN repository which send us a diff file after each
> commit). Since we are now mostly in maintenance more we mostly rely on
> the diff files to see what the other has committed and possibly comment.
Yes, but this is overhead that unfortunately needs to be set up for
every translation team, by the members them self mostly.
> Most of the sentences we have to translate now resemble sentences we
> already have translated and Qt Linguist notices this and proposes us
> possible translations.
Pootle does suggest as well, but on a per word base IIRC.
> I can easily understand however that some people would prefer using a
> web application with a single copy of the translation that many users
> can update at the same time. For translations which still have a lot of
> strings left to translate I can see this as a definite advantage.
I think collaboration is easier indeed as everybody is seeing the actual
items to translate instead of possibly duplicating work other
translators still have in their local tree.
> We have to make sure the applications we are looking at produces files
> which are 100% compatible with Qt, that they don't cause translations
> issues or even worse, application issues...
My testing so far has lead to a working file, although the first diff is
quite large for all ts files. Most differences are comsetical ones,
however there is the issue of the pauscal/plural issue.
The other major difference is that Qt Linguist (or translators) seem to
escape special charachters. So far my testing with the Pootle generated
ts file (that does not escape special characters) seems to work fine. Do
you know what is the reason that the escape sequences are present in the
current .ts files?
> Anything that supports Qt ts files natively has a big advantage over the
> rest as far as I am concerned.
Pootle does that, apart from the pauscal/plural bug.
> I am sure both Kenni and I will take a closer look at Pootle once the
> plural problem will have been fixed.
Please do so, judging from the bug the developers hope to have a hack in
place soonish as they are mantioning release 2.1.
Kind regards,
Jonathan